Governing through Reason
Open Mic June 1
Happy it’s over
This week, Fox News ran a four-minute video attacking President Obama — twice — on Fox & Friends. And then, after a conservative blogger slammed them for it, decided to blame it on employees going rogue. John Edwards dodged a bullet. Five Seattleites didn’t.
Don’t see an article on a particular topic, but want to talk about it somewhere? This is Open Mic. Talk about whatever you want, but stay respectful.
We create a new Open Mic every week to give a clean slate, but feel free to add to this topic at any time.
-
Given Barret also ran in 2010, if he now loses again he becomes a 2 time loser and highly unlikely to run again in yet another election in 2014.
So what? Barret’s not the only big-name Wisconsin Democrat. Russ Feingold, for instance, stayed out of this race on purpose, probably to let Barret have his last shot at it. Plenty of others in the wings. A loss by Barret just means Walker stays in for the term he was going to have anyway. Republicans gain ziltch.
Not to mention there will surely be some backlash from voters for all the time Democrats have wasted on a failed recall.
“Backlash” by the people who liked Walker anyway isn’t very impressive, nor will it have much effect either way. There’s already been a far larger backlash against Walker’s extremist overreach and his attempts to kill unions completely in Wisconsin. Indies aren’t likely to vote for him again, and are more likely to come out for Obama in the fall.
Walker’s first year was a well-executed coup. If Walker stays in office, undoubtedly it will further embolden Republicans throughout the country in their efforts to strip workers of rights and benefits. (That means you, bub. Kiss your paid holiday goodbye.) I know that the Worshippers of the Demigods of Industry think it’s a good thing that we lose healthcare and pensions and paid sick leave, that we return to 60-hour workweeks (when we can find a job at all) and start once more employing 10-year-olds in sweatshops for $0.25 / day.
There is a desperate move to make America of 2013 as much like America of 1928 as possible. That’s okay. We may have to teach the lessons of the 1930’s to a new generation. History goes in cycles. It may be time for another dose of robber barons to utterly screw up the world before we remember the reasons why We the People are supposed to have power in America.
-
#103 written by Max 11 months ago
-
#105 written by rgbact 11 months ago
A loss by Barret just means Walker stays in for the term he was going to have anyway. Republicans gain ziltch.
Walker won by 5% in 2010, the biggest GOP election year in years. If he can win by 5%+ and raise gobs of money in a highly publicized race where the GOP is not as popular.….you can kiss 2014 goodbye. Certainly no high profile Democrats will be chomping at a 3rd chance to go against him and his now even bigger war chest. Russ Feingold bailed this time.…but you think he’s in for 2014? C’mon. Sadly for Dems. Feingold would’ve probably run in 2014 otherwise, but even he’s likely disgusted by the union temper tantrums at this point.
Republicans would like to cast it as a waste regardless, of course. That doesn’t mean that the moderate voters in Wisconsin will agree.
Hard to say. Has there ever been such a high profile recall attempt that failed? My sense is there is some expectation by “moderate” voters on winning the recall if you bother to put a state through all that and not treat it like a lawyer that sues people just cause there’s no downside. -
-
Walker won by 5% in 2010, the biggest GOP election year in recent memory. If he can win by 5%+ and raise gobs of money in a highly publicized race where the GOP is not as popular…
… it means nothing. He raised “gobs of money” from huge far-right PACs and oligarchs like the Koch bothers, who are scared spitless because their anti-American schemes are being revealed. And if Walker wins the recall election, it just means that special elections are hard to draw any conclusions from. Do recall, this is only the third recall election for a governor in the history of the United States. (Did you know that?) That the recall actually happened is already a huge victory for The People.
Hard to say. Has there ever been such a high profile recall attempt that failed?
Yes. Research the two previous recalls of governors. Tell us your findings.
-
By the way, raising “gobs of money” for an election these days says nothing. Citizen’s United practically insured that far-right extremists causes will raise “gobs of money” from now on. Walker’s union-busting happened to help inure that unions couldn’t raise “gobs of money” anymore — that’s a big part of the reason why far-right extremists are going after unions.
Six of the ten largest political contributors in the US are corporate entities, including the four largest. Three of the ten largest contributors are union-oriented. If right-wing fascists can break America’s unions, they’ll have the field to themselves. If Citizen’s United stands, we’ll have unlimited, unregulated money, foreign and domestic, flooding our electoral system from the likes of the Kochs and the Chamber of Commerce, and corporate bundlers like Crossroads.
I know rightists like rgbact actually like that idea. Democracy and people looking for a living wage will suffer. So will the very idea of America.
-
#109 written by rgbact 11 months ago
Yes. Research the two previous recalls of governors. Tell us your findings.
Looks like only 12 states even allow state recalls. Therefore, its likely not meant to be used as a “lets do over the last election since we can’t lose” ploy just to menace officeholders for kicks. In CA for instance, Arnold won his recall in a landslide, clearly repudiating Gray Davis. The other one was ND back in 1921. The result was close, so you can argue that it was uncalled for. This would be the first unsuccessful recall attempt of a guv and at a minimum the similar showing of Walker to his previous win indicates this is nothing more than an attempt at a redo of 2010. I suspect this will cause a review of all state recall systems. -
-
The result was close, so you can argue that it was uncalled for.
No, you can’t. The citizens called for it. A recall can’t happen otherwise. That means it was called for. Sort of by definition.
Is it your position that no election needs to happen, if it is close, or if the incumbent is re-elected?
In most modern democracies, elections happen whenever the public wants them. What we call “recall elections” are fairly comparable to “votes of confidence” in other democracies. That has the happy effect of keeping more of the public involved in and knowledgeable about politics, and rising the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote.
Oh, but wait, Republicans want to suppress the vote.
-
#112 written by Max 11 months ago
In CA for instance, Arnold won his recall in a landslide, clearly repudiating Gray Davis.
Jeez Louise, rgbact, I really do wish you would do a LITTLE research before making assertions. I would much rather NOT have to keep correcting you. Since I lived in San Diego during that period, I do know a little about the matter firsthand.
Arnold DID NOT win the recall in a “landslide”. He took only 48% of the vote for replacing Davis, but, yes, that was more than the next several candidates combined.
In fact, he could have won 98% of the vote and still not have been elected governor.
-
#113 written by mclever 11 months ago
@DC
I’m also happy that the SCOTUS decision was extremely limited, and did not attempt to address any larger questions. In general, that’s the way SCOTUS should operate.
Agreed. I think a narrow ruling was particularly appropriate in the Reichle v Howards decision, because it results in potential restriction of a citizen’s Constitutional rights.
-
#114 written by rgbact 11 months ago
Jeez Louise, rgbact, I really do wish you would do a LITTLE research before making assertions.
The vote was 55% to 45% for the recall, and Arnold got 17% more than the alternate Democrat. Davis had won by 5% in his 2002 reëlection. That appears to be a clear change in voter sentiment.
I would much rather NOT have to keep correcting you.
I dont mind the correcting, I don’t present myself as an all knowing savant on every issue. Offering corrections or a new perspective is an expected part of debating the issues. My problem with you is the belittling way you do it and that you correct just to insult and not to support your own arguments. For instance, did correcting my “landslide” comment really change any part of my argument? Was it needed to enhance the debate about recalls? Or was it just your way of insulting me for kicks and with little benefit to the debate. -
#115 written by Max 11 months ago
rgbact,
Davis was cratering for over two years before the recall. Between the collapse of the dot com bubble and the electricity crisis (brought to you by Enron!), Davis would have been lucky to win giving away gold-plated Cadillacs! The 55% in favor of the recall was closer than many expected. If the vote had been against recall, Arnold could have won 98% of the vote and not been governor, since there were two, separate, votes. Recall, simple yes or no. And:: If the vote is “yes”, who? So Arnold didn’t “beat” Davis. Bustamante, as the sitting Lt. Gov. was hardly more popular than Davis. No wonder that Arnold and Tom McClintock together won over 60% of the “who” vote. Larry Flynt got 17k+, Gary Coleman got 12k+ and porn star Mary Carey got 11k+ votes!!
Hell, in late 2000, at a FERC commissioner’s hearing in San Diego, I testified to a tumultuous ovation, and Davis got booed! That’s how unpopular he was! I was surprised he won in 2002! -
#116 written by rgbact 11 months ago
-
#117 written by Armchair Warlord 11 months ago
http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2012/06/abu_yahya_al_libi_rumored_kill.php
We may have just killed Abu Yahya al-Libi in a drone airstrike, which would be the greatest blow to Al Qaeda since we iced Osama. Stay tuned. -
#118 written by shortchain 11 months ago
-
#119 written by Mule Rider 11 months ago
-
#120 written by Mule Rider 11 months ago
-
-
-
-
-
#125 written by Max 11 months ago
-
-
#128 written by mclever 11 months ago
In other news, there’s yet another poll out that shows the approval of legalizing marriage equality for homosexuals continues to accelerate.
The newest poll from CNN shows 54% of Americans in favor of legalizing gay marriage, up from 51% just a year ago. That’s 54% vs. 42% opposed, a complete flip from where we stood in 2009 when it was 44% in favor vs. 54% opposed. That’s how fast attitudes are changing in only three years. Of course, a quick glance at the Yahoo comments regarding this poll suggests many still harbor strong resistance and denial of these trends.
Democrats and independents were closely aligned, with 70% and 60% respectively in favor of legalization, while Republicans were 72% opposed. There also seem to be sharp dividing lines by age:
18–34 –> 73% in favor, 24% opposed
35–64 –> ~35% favor strongly, 37% oppose strongly, with some wiggle room in the 25% that fall in either of the “not strongly” categories.
65+ –> 34% in favor, 61% opposed
For folks like my cousin who is now happily married to her wife here in Iowa, this has to be an encouraging sign for future recognition of their committed relationship if/when they move to a new state after she finishes grad school. -
You must be logged in to post a comment.
- Comment Feed for this Post
@rgbact
If it were just PPP, I might agree with you. But if you read the second link that I posted, you’ll see that there is more than one poll showing the Wisconsin recall race tightening to within the MOE. Walker still shows a lead in both polls, so he should still win, but it’s getting closer.
Furthermore, the voter reaction to the recall effort depends a lot on perception. If most residents are unhappy with Walker, then they might be more angry that the effort to recall him failed rather than at the “waste” of taxpayer dollars. Republicans would like to cast it as a waste regardless, of course. That doesn’t mean that the moderate voters in Wisconsin will agree.